The Tree of Knowledge planted Eastward in Eden

Thinking about what Glenn said, about Aron and Kate being alike, I realized that knowledge plays a significant role in the development of all the main characters. Adam is perhaps the most striking example; at first he's unable to receive or process knowledge, hence his inability to consider his father's embezzlement and his blinders with regards to Kate, when in both instances Charles was able to see the situation clearly. Adam is presented with knowledge dramatically, when Kate leaves him; it takes him some time, and the help of a couple of his friends, to come to grips with that knowledge, but it eventually leads him to become a moral man. It gives him power over the scheming Kate, and an ability to face the challenges of life.

Kate, on the other hand, refuses (or is unable*) to process knowledge (of good, not evil). Aron is unable to process knowledge of evil (at least, within the scope of the book. Who knows whether his final scene is just him embarking on a journey of discovery similar to Adam's). Cal is an interesting case; he seems to seek out knowledge. This leads to abuses when he's young and unable to control the power the knowledge gives him, and later when his passions are inflamed over the slighting of his present. But he grows through the novel in wielding the power, and in the end shows a level of maturity and even responsibility.

As far as timshel goes, I think I side with Glenn. As presented, it's more or less the embodiment of agency. Which, as we all remember from the Book of Mormon seminary videos, is dependent on knowledge.

With regards to Cal's gift, and why it was rejected, I don't know about the "cultural" interpretation. I know it can be many things at once, but to me Cal's gift is steeped in an instrumental view of the world, where things (and other people) are there to be manipulated and used, rather than a respect for others as co-equals. I think it reflects very much the aspects of socialism and communism that Steinbeck believed so strongly in. This isn't a uniquely "American" question, in that sense, but America, particularly the West, where things are new and ready to be remade into other things is a perfect setting to work out these issues.

Finally, on the actual text, I'll just say that while I read it I was struck by how much better the writing was than a lot of the stuff I choose to read. I'd been thinking about whether classics were simply popular novels that got enshrined because they ended up on some English teacher's reading list. But in this case, the writing really is, IMO, sublime.

* On the issue of Kate's inability to process knowledge, it strikes me as counter to Steinbeck's conceptualization of timshel. He protrays her frequently throughout the novel as being incapable of good, thus the "thou mayest" construct doesn't seem to apply to her. Perhaps that's why he introduces her as being sub-human, a demon, etc. in the opening section; otherwise he couldn't rectify his thesis with one of his main characters.